Micro Engineering Code55 vs. Atlas Code55

[central.vermont]

Gang,
I may have a chance to buy some ME switches and was wondering how they compare to the
Atlas switches. Does anyone have any pictures of the two side by side?
Any pros and cons also would be nice. I'm already quite familiar with the Atlas switches
just not familiar with the ME switches.

Thanks, Jon

[nkalanaga]

All I have are the ME, as the Atlas turnouts weren't yet being made when I bought mine.  They work well enough, but may need some tuning.  Mine were fairly early production, and later releases may have been improved.  Also, all of my locos have lo-pro wheels, turned by Trainworx years ago, which makes them more sensitive to track problems.  If you use pizza cutter flanges you shouldn't have any problems at all.

1:  Most of the frogs were "humped", with the middle of the casting higher than the ends.  It wasn't noticeable until one tried to run a train over it.  If this causes problems, the frog can be filed, using a large flat file.  If caught before installation, the turnout can be placed on a hard flat surface and the frog gently hammered flat.  The problem is that locos don't derail at the frog!  The most sensitive of mine were first-run Kato Fs, and the trailing truck, on a facing-point move, taking the curved side, would derail at the points.  What happened was that the early Kato Fs had no side-to-side play (rocking) in their trucks, and the lead truck, on the side going over the frog, would be lifted by the hump.  This also lifted the trailing truck, just enough for the flange to clear the curved point, and continue on the straight route.  Taking the straight side worked fine, as there was nothing to firce the rear tuck out of line, even if it did lift.  I spent a lot of time shimming the point areas, trying to solve the derailments, before finding the real cause.

To check for this, use a straightedge longer than the turnout, and see of the rails through the frog meet the edge all the way.  There shouldn't be any gaps.

2:  I've had a few points come loose from the throwbar, but those have been easy to resolder.

3:  They left a gap under the rails at the end ties.  Don't try to fit a rail joiner in there, as it will still lift the end of the rails.  Cut the ties off and replace with wooden ones.  You can thin them to fit under the joiner, or file notches to fit around the joiner, whichever looks best to you.  The notches work better with well-ballasted track, as the top of the tie is even with the plastic ones, but filing the tie thinner is easier, as you don't have to get the notches in the right spots.

I also soldered wires to the frogs to ensure they were powered.  If you do this, it can be done after the track is laid, at the heel of the frog, or by soldering to the underside before laying.  The early ME turnouts were power-routing, with the points directing the power, but I don't remember if the frogs were connected to the points or not.  They may have been, or they may have been dead.  It's been years ago!

[mmagliaro]

EDITS for typos...

I used ME turnouts exclusively, with ME code 55 track, on my previous layout.  They had gauge problems just like
the Atlas ones, where the gauge through the point rails was narrow on some of them, forcing me to do some filing.
However, this was not as prevalent as what I see in the Atlas 55, where practically every turnout needs to have its
gauge fixed, or x-8-x steam will climb up out of the rails unless you deliberately set your engines a "little narrow", which is
inviting a whole host of other problems.

I did have a few throwbars come unsoldered from the rails, and had to resolder them, but this usually happened when I was filing
the tips of the point rails, not after they were in service.

These were all the pre "DCC friendly" ones, not the DCC friendly ones that ME makes now.  I am not sure how they changed.  The old ones were power-routing,
where the diverging route was only powered when then turnout was thrown to that route.
I DID use microswitches hooked with a linkage to the throwbar, to power the frog and the point rails.  Otherwise, dirt makes
the point rails go dead, and the frog isn't powered, which is not a good idea.

Overall, I would use them again over the Atlas.  I think they are better made. BUT, the ties look different enough from the
Atlas that I can't live with it aesthetically, so I don't use them anymore.

[DKS]

I had the ME switches on my last layout. Note all of the previous comments on the frog warp, etc.; I did not find these to be huge issues.

One big difference between ME and Atlas is the MEs have an overtravel spring on the throwbar, very much like Pecos. And, as it is for Pecos, the spring helps hold the points in place, and keep them from flopping around or falling out. However, unlike Pecos, the ME spring tension is highly variable; some are quite strong. If you are going to power them, it'll take a fair bit of force to throw. If you use Tortoises, you may need to beef up the linkage. For myself, I made manual throws using telescoping tubing with a piece of music wire soldered into a hole near the end to throw the rod. I also installed a microswitch on the end of the throw to power the frog.

[mmagliaro]

David makes a good point about the over-center springs.   I used Caboose Industries ground throws, and those usually
had enough beef to move the points even with the spring in there.  But on some of them, I actually clipped the springs out
so the points were free to slide, and I relied on the ground throw to hold them in place.

[central.vermont]

Thanks guys for all the good info. I pulled the trigger and now own 7 ME switches. 

Jon

[robert3985]

Good choice.

C'mon guys!...if you're going to power ME turnouts with Tortoises or anything else, just snip the overcenter springs off!  Simple.  Make sure the rod you use to move the throwbar pushes the closure point assembly towards the frog, or they may fall out of the "hinges".

Cheers!
Bob Gilmore

[CoalPorter]

Did ME ever get past 1 or 2 sizes ? Compared to how many from Atlas?
 
And then Atlas has other things like diamonds and curved TOs?

I think the Atlas C55 have a little finer scale appearance (more closer
to ME C40), so i have used A C55 with a bunch of ME40 flex track I had
in storage from way back, and it looks great and works well.

[DKS]

Good choice.

C'mon guys!...if you're going to power ME turnouts with Tortoises or anything else, just snip the overcenter springs off!  Simple.  Make sure the rod you use to move the throwbar pushes the closure point assembly towards the frog, or they may fall out of the "hinges".

Cheers!
Bob Gilmore

Personally I've not liked this approach, as even with tension on the throwbar, I've had the switches work themselves apart. But hey, if it works for you, kudos.

Did ME ever get past 1 or 2 sizes ? Compared to how many from Atlas?
 
And then Atlas has other things like diamonds and curved TOs?

I think the Atlas C55 have a little finer scale appearance (more closer
to ME C40), so i have used A C55 with a bunch of ME40 flex track I had
in storage from way back, and it looks great and works well.

Micro Engineering has not expanded their switch line past the their #6, which is offered with either Code 70 or 55 rail. ME is a very small shop, as opposed to Atlas, which is the General Motors of N scale by comparison.

[mmagliaro]

Good choice.

C'mon guys!...if you're going to power ME turnouts with Tortoises or anything else, just snip the overcenter springs off!  Simple.  Make sure the rod you use to move the throwbar pushes the closure point assembly towards the frog, or they may fall out of the "hinges".

Cheers!
Bob Gilmore

Personally I've not liked this approach, as even with tension on the throwbar, I've had the switches work themselves apart. But hey, if it works for you, kudos.
...
...
...

Ah... David, yes, I forgot about this issue.  YES, I have had this happen.

I fixed it a different way than having the turnout linkage put pressure in the right direction.

The throwbar itself sits between two ties.   Let's think about the tie that is furthest from the frog. (It's the tie that the engine
crosses first as it enters the turnout).   The throwbar can move back and forth like it's supposed to, but it also can slide toward this
tie as the rail joiners pull out and unhinge.  I cemented a small .010" shim to the tie in there, so the throwbar had nowhere to go,
and that fixed the cases where the rails were pulling out.

[John]

ME is a very small shop, as opposed to Atlas, which is the General Motors of N scale by comparison.

I really wish they would be Toyota ...

[dmidkiff]

I've been using the ME switches on my layout and have been really happy with them.  I put a little extra work into them that some may not want too, but here it is. 

I remove the over center spring and the brass "throwbar" that ME uses under the points.  Since it is just a small piece of brass, a few swipes with a soldering iron will release it from the points.  You just have to be careful about melting the two ties on either side of the throwbar, hence the swipes with the iron, not just holding it there (some flux helps to to clean the joint before it melts).  I then remove the point rails to clean and file them.  A pc board tie replaces the throwbar and gives me the flexibilty to move the point rails where they sit best.  A micro switch on the outside provides manual control as well as powering the frog.  As mentioned before, the frog needs to be filed to remove the hump that is there out of the package.

I would liked to start learning how to scratchbuild switches and will go that route on the next layout, but for now, I have a stock of ME switches and I have been very happy with how they perform with a little bit of work.

Doug

[nkalanaga]

"I really wish they would be Toyota ..."  Wouldn't that be Kato?

[robert3985]

Personally I've not liked this approach, as even with tension on the throwbar, I've had the switches work themselves apart. But hey, if it works for you, kudos.

I build my own turnouts to use on my layout, but,...when I work on someone else's, I have used that technique, as well as substitute a PCB "throwbar" that fits tighter between the headblocks to lock the points into the 'heels".  It works well, with no working its way out if I construct a more rigid "throw rod" between the fulcrum of a Tortoise to the "throwbar" of the turnout out of small brass tubing with .022" piano wire properly bent and soldered to the tube's ends.

On my DCC test module, all of my ME turnouts are dead-frog, and I retain the over-center spring on the points.  No probs and simple since it's just a test module.

Cheers!
Bob Gilmore

[central.vermont]

Thanks for all the info here gang. I now have the ME switches and will take all idea's
given here into the final track laying.

Jon